Can Hassidic philosopher, Martin Buber be credited as one of the teachers of the philosophical error of immanentism to the generation of immanentists currently populating Rome?

What is well known is Buber’s racist, pantheist (rebadged “panentheist” by him) understanding of Shekinah which he associated with physical “Israel” (i.e. “the Jews”). It would come as no surprise then that Kasper, after having been properly mentored in Judaic self-worship, would turn out to be one of the most valuable Judaic assets in the Vatican working in his capacity as President of the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews.

Religious relations with “the Jews” have been on the up since Kasper’s appointment as any Catholic schoolchild can tell you after being lectured on the horrible nature of the Christian “teaching of contempt” (see: the Gospel) by an ADL rabbi, an ADL indoctrinated school teacher or through Catholic school teaching material produced by Judaic bankers documented here:

Kasper has spoken about Buber’s synthesis of “interfaith dialogue” which has proven so disastrous for Christianity:

“Dialogue” is a relatively new concept in philosophy and in theology as well. It has its roots in the personalistic philosophy of the first half of the 20th century, especially in the Jewish personalistic philosophy of Martin Buber, Franz Rosenzweig, Emanuel Levinas and others. (Walter Kasper, Communion Through Dialogue)

As Martin Buber, one of the most significant representatives of dialogical thinking, says, the truth is located not only in direct subject-object relations but in a “dia”, a “between” which is opened up between the dialogue partners and in which both have a share. Only in the “dia”, the between of a I-thou and a We-relation, do we “have” or, better, do we participate in the objective reality; the subject-object-reality is thus embedded in the subject-subject reality of communication and dialogue. (Walter Kasper, Communion Through Dialogue)

With sublime Hassidic philosophical “truths” such as the above en vogue in Rome, it’s no wonder that there’s no longer any place for the clunky old thinking of St. Thomas.

How many of you knew how great the influence the thinking of Hassidic philospher, Martin Buber has been in the disastrous course the Vatican has taken in recent decades?

With that thought in mind, I have two questions for the writers and editors of Latin Mass magazine. I’ve seen that a series of articles has started in the recent edition of Latin Mass on the topic of the philosophical error of immanentism, the first article curiously citing virtually unknown “Hebrew Catholic,” Ronda Chervin as an authority for the Catholic side alongside St. Thomas, Pope St. Pius X and documents from the First Vatican Council.

Will the Judaic component of the subversion of Catholic thinking be addressed as it has been here, or will it continue to be studiously avoided as it traditionally has been in the past by Latin Mass magazine?

Can Hassidic philosopher, Martin Buber be credited as one of the teachers of the philosophical error of immanentism to the generation of immanentists currently populating Rome?

What is well known is Buber’s racist, pantheist (rebadged “panentheist” by him) understanding of Shekinah which he associated with physical “Israel” (i.e. “the Jews”). It would come as no surprise then that Kasper, after having been properly mentored in Judaic self-worship, would turn out to be one of the most valuable Judaic assets in the Vatican working in his capacity as President of the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews.

Religious relations with “the Jews” have been on the up since Kasper’s appointment as any Catholic schoolchild can tell you after being lectured on the horrible nature of the Christian “teaching of contempt” (see: the Gospel) by an ADL rabbi, an ADL indoctrinated school teacher or through Catholic school teaching material produced by Judaic bankers documented here:

Kasper has spoken about Buber’s synthesis of “interfaith dialogue” which has proven so disastrous for Christianity:

“Dialogue” is a relatively new concept in philosophy and in theology as well. It has its roots in the personalistic philosophy of the first half of the 20th century, especially in the Jewish personalistic philosophy of Martin Buber, Franz Rosenzweig, Emanuel Levinas and others. (Walter Kasper, Communion Through Dialogue)

As Martin Buber, one of the most significant representatives of dialogical thinking, says, the truth is located not only in direct subject-object relations but in a “dia”, a “between” which is opened up between the dialogue partners and in which both have a share. Only in the “dia”, the between of a I-thou and a We-relation, do we “have” or, better, do we participate in the objective reality; the subject-object-reality is thus embedded in the subject-subject reality of communication and dialogue. (Walter Kasper, Communion Through Dialogue)

With sublime Hassidic philosophical “truths” such as the above en vogue in Rome, it’s no wonder that there’s no longer any place for the clunky old thinking of St. Thomas.

How many of you knew how great the influence the thinking of Hassidic philospher, Martin Buber has been in the disastrous course the Vatican has taken in recent decades?

With that thought in mind, I have two questions for the writers and editors of Latin Mass magazine. I’ve seen that a series of articles has started in the recent edition of Latin Mass on the topic of the philosophical error of immanentism, the first article curiously citing virtually unknown “Hebrew Catholic,” Ronda Chervin as an authority for the Catholic side alongside St. Thomas, Pope St. Pius X and documents from the First Vatican Council.

Will the Judaic component of the subversion of Catholic thinking be addressed as it has been here, or will it continue to be studiously avoided as it traditionally has been in the past by Latin Mass magazine?